How to reform metal?

Metal in 1994: vital, Romanticist, not beholden to any political tradition, not afraid of taboo.

Metal in 2008: sounds very similar, a lot of activity but few GREAT releases, afraid of political taboo, generally embracing leftism/capitalism/popularity.

(a) What happened? (My answer: when things get popular, the horde of people who want to use those things to further their own self-esteem surges in, and creates a "safe" version that rapidly bores everyone and so only boring people apply.)

(b) How do we fix it? (My answer: we find a word for the type of metal that is truly important, and associate releases with it, and use these to show people the contrast and to encourage a separatist subgenre, even if formed of the same styles as exist already)

Main problem would be metal musicians. They probably won't stand behind any "unsafe" content that at last seems to be in their music, while all crust, grind and lefist death metal musicians will attack their environment with their dogma.

Not necessarily. Given that marketing slogans ("brutal death metal", "depressive suicidal black metal") somehow manage to cling onto the public and feign valid subgenres, carrying out some inconspicuous infoterror might do the trick. Once someone smart tosses a catchy name for the "good metal" genre (which hopefully won't be "anus metal" or "prozakcore"), refer to the music by that moniker in discussions, tag stuff on last.fm, etc. When asked about its origin and meaning, just say you've heard it from another metalhead at a Burzum concert and explain the general idea pointing out that it makes sense in regard to quality vs crap. People react strongly to bold markers of identity, so it's a good idea to decentralize the syndication of propaganda just in case people have a knee-jerk reaction to anything ANUS - which means that Onan shouldn't really announce the birth of a new genre on every single metal forum with a smartass statement about elitism. No offence intended here, but keeping this low-profile is crucial if we really want to succeed at contaminating a mainstream metal mindset with something nobler.

At any rate, I remember hearing from a guy a couple of years ago that Burzum is ambient metal. Not sure if he'd been to this site, but it makes me believe that effecting such a shift in terminology is perfectly viable.

Jokes aside, I feel that there's a definite possibility to regroup at least a few bands under a whole new banner that could be accepted by the metal population at large. What has linked quite a few of the best releases of the past 10 years is the importance that bands like Crimson Massacre, Acerbus, Gorguts or even Averse Sefira have given to compositional rigor.

I think it's been stated quite a few times on this forum; in the following years, this kind of more theoretical songwriting will supersede the more intuitive sort of the early nineties amongst the future great releases. There's only so much one can accomplish without actually analysing the form of the genre, and releases like the latest Profanatica, as great as it is, are bound to become fewer and farther apart in the future.

I believe that it would be extremely interesting to create an actual characterisation for bands that can manage to differentiate themselves from the mostly retarded subgenre that is "brutal/technical death metal".

I wholly believe that elimination of bullshit at the local level will help to spawn more great bands. For example, everyone knows those hipster bands in their local area or their "scene" -- "zomg we suck but we can sound totally like the genre we're playing and nothing better, so we're cool, and listen to us, mmkay??" and how they vastly outnumber the greater bands. These idiots stifle the growth of these other bands, like an overgrowth of weeds will stifle the growth of fresh crops.

By denouncing the self-loathing "humble" hipster shit and seeking out and promoting the best you can find in your area who meet and strive for this higher criteria (see the literature under the DLA for this criteria), and whether these bands do so knowingly or not, you can help to ensure the best of this music lives on and evolves into something greater than what we have now.

I know from observation however that bands tied to their local "scene" might be pressured into dumbing down their music for the hipster progressive "don't be better than us or else we'll call you a pretentious meanie" bands who surround them. I think the Melvins would be a great example of this effect -- first being a Black Sabbath worship band of sorts, then quickly jumping into a boring different flavor of alt-rock after being isolated from the metal underground for the whole of their existence.

It's all a bit similar to how schooling these days holds down the smart kids in the class so they don't make the dumb kids feel any dumber than they already are. Well, that, and a combination of the teacher praising all of the dumb kids for every little thing they do correctly, even if it's mediocre.

I feel that there's a definite possibility to regroup at least a few bands under a whole new banner that could be accepted by the metal population at large. What has linked quite a few of the best releases of the past 10 years is the importance that bands like Crimson Massacre, Acerbus, Gorguts or even Averse Sefira have given to compositional rigor.

I agree, and I think a good name is important. Ur-metal? Vir-metal? Conflict metal? Essential metal?

I'm not sure if new terminology will work on its own. (Maybe it will, like a shibboleth. Shine on, you crazy Jews.)

Perhaps we should drop the "metal" part of it? This should seed more creativity than just appending an adjective or noun in front of the word "metal."

"metal" hasn't been as tired as appending the -core prefix to everything (skacore, deathcore, metalcore, folkcore, rapcore), but we should give it a shot. Neoclassical sounds good enough to categorize the good music into, but that works only as an umbrella term.

I like the sound that the term "death grind" or "deathgrind" has, because it drops the terms "metal" and "-core", but the term can still imply grindcore with death metal influence, like the band Blood. "Thrash", as a unique standalone term, has a similar independent definition. Yet, as we know, the media re-dubbed it "thrash metal." Regardless, we still recognize that thrash, despite that it's just a single word, implies music which drew influence from hardcore punk and speed metal, and there are no redundant descriptors like "metal" or "-core."

It's a good approach, though neoclassical might sound a bit too broad just for specifying a segment of metal.

The name would have to be capable of sustaining itself independently while retaining its relation to the initial idea. "Esoteric metal" sounds sexy, but I can imagine lots of "deeewd, listen to Sunn O))) and Postmodern Okkvltistik Necrocaust, they play out of tune on fucking plastic violins jacked to a fucking fuzzbox. That's so fucking esoteric you won't get a thing!" I know this is an issue with virtually any genre name, so either way a symbolic war (on teh internets) would have to be fought to ground the meaning of the new term in the public consciousness.

I suspect that with the degree to which metal has been infested with filth, the only solution is to allow it to gradually die. At the same time it is important to support good bands, in the hope that an 'ark' can be preserved to be passed on to the next generation of intelligent hessians. This would be small in quantity but easily greater than the rest of metal in quality, which is the only important factor in any artform. Attempting to separate this 'ark' from the rest of the crap seems like a good idea, in order to prevent contamination so to speak.

We might be able to seperate the "ark", but the problem still lies in the kids who decide to make a band and produce music that copies or sounds like the good bands. Sadly in socitey today we cannot restrict those bands from making their own music.

We might be able to seperate the "ark", but the problem still lies in the kids who decide to make a band and produce music that copies or sounds like the good bands. Sadly in socitey today we cannot restrict those bands from making their own music.

This cannot be helped, so it's not something we need to worry about. Why don't we agree on a term so people can start using it around the net? I liked esoteric metal.